BBC News - Rebrand 10

Tell that to almost everyone else on this website.

Also I'm not professional, I'm not "industry standard" and nor do I want to be, that's my choice and nobody can tell me otherwise.

If you can't see your own mocks being used on TV, then why on earth do you design?

Aside from the fact that your mocks still aren't up to scratch (for me), I'm actually quite disappointed to read your comments... you don't seem to have improved, you don't seem to want to improve, and you don't like it when you get the obvious negative feedback. dbl's comments may appear forthright but he's very much correct - if you're serious about designing something appealing (surely you must be or else you wouldn't be posting it here), you've really got to get to grips with some meaty software. You'll find it really difficult at first but you'll pick it up, and if you persist with it, you'll end up liking it. There are hundreds of online tutorials available to watch. Having a good grasp of After Effects would only enhance your designing ability and no doubt give you some well deserved positive feedback.

It's important to really take on board the comments you receive here (even if it means reading between the lines). Take a look at the News at Ten studio I did - I can honestly say every bit of constructive criticism encouraged me to push 3ds Max to its limits and really see what could be done. That mock wouldn't be rated 'impressive' if it wasn't for the helpful feedback and advice I received.

I never said, I can't see my mock being used on TV, I said every mock on here wouldn't be used on Tv, hence why it's a mock.

The only feedback (which I can see) is on the gradient, which I am going to keep, as I've said I have to take on advice, but still like the mock myself, I like the gradients so I can choose to keep them. This doesn't mean I'm not taking feedback, I will select what I think will improve my mock.

Again, it's my choice to choose what programs I create my mock with, just because I used AfterEffects for a tiny part doesn't mean I have to use it for everything, people wanted me to try it and I experimented, didn't like it and that's it.

Also in regards to not taking on comments, I took feed back from youtube comments.

"Great mock, but I don't think they actually need to change graphics, it's more of the format, it's so dull, it needs to be axed, as for Good Morning Britain they need to change there theme and graphics, presenters too"

&

"Disclaimer: I know nothing about graphic design, I just like pretty colours and cool music.

The amount of sampling is way too low in whatever program you're using for your studio renders. It's making everything grainy. It'll take a lot more time to render, but try increasing the amount of sampling rays in your 3d renders.

The graphics you made in After Effects aren't bad, they just seem incomplete. If you take a look at Michal Gryga's mock BBC design in slow motion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wbeba_-95aE
(Click the cog icon on the bottom right and select 0.5 speed)
You'll see there's a lot of stuff going on in the background. Just throw that in and it should work."

Whether After Effects would improve the quality or not, it would be unfair to exclude PATV's designs because he can't purchase the software. I agree it would be beneficial for PATV to learn how to use it, as he clearly has the good ideas, and has pushed PowerPoint to its limits.

However, if PATV has said he is not currently in a position to purchase After Effects, I think it's a good idea to suggest free alternatives rather than stressing how good AF is.

The situation at the moment is like somebody saying they have a £145,000 budget for a house, and everyone saying how lovely the £345,000 house is.

So maybe a good idea for the people wanting to help PATV would be suggesting free alternatives to After Effects? That seems to be the most logical solution in my personal opinion.

My comments may have been brash, but all I was trying to say is. Don't write off After Effects after a few go's. I'm not expecting him to fork out for using the software, but it allows you to create better transitions/elements than Powerpoint. There isn't really any proper free alternatives, so he should make the most out of the trial and learn some tutorials on YouTube.

And as I said the trial is over, it ran out a couple of weeks ago

How can you improve your project then? You seem to of ran yourself into a dead end.

But in this case, After Effects is the fruit and vege.

I can do more graphics, I'm in the process of making the pushback and I have a part of this mock which is my own idea that isn't finished yet. Which I'm still working on so I still have plenty to improve and work on

If you count YouTube live streams as TV, then you're wrong.


(And in this example, it nearly ended up being simulcast on Freeview)

That said, I'm pretty sure the odd mock logo has appeared on broadcast TV when a hurried / lazy researcher has needed a logo and just googled for it. People have certainly got TV work based on portfolios including mock designs that have been shown on this site, so don't go dismissing everyone else's work just because you don't see the point in making a polished product.

My own opinion: This now seems to be turning into a conversation that suggests that to make decent mocks you have to have money and you can only use 1 piece of software. It's also worth noting that this is completely off topic to the original mock, why can't people just leave critique on the actual mock rather than making it very personal. There's loads of software out there that you animate with, to be honest any good video editing software gives you the option to do keyframe etc. animation.

I use Serif MoviePlus x5 which gives you animation flexibility and lots more than PowerPoint. It's easy to get the hang of and I'm not finding it restrictions, I can do what I want to with the help of some photo editing. That's not my suguesting "BUY THE PROGRAM I USE". There's others out there. Maybe have a look at HitFilm, it's an AE alternative and there's a free version. I've not used it myself but maybe take a look.

A modified Challenge TV logo appeared on a website, IIRC.